Reader Comments (26)

But you don’t understand. Because of the perverted way they calculate "subsidies" an across the board tax cut for the oil industry actually cuts the calculated level of "subsidy" they get*. This means that what PwC is actually calling for is a reduction in subsidy which is consistent with a tax on carbon.

* When George Osborne reduced the Supplementary Charge (SC) from 30% to 20% this had the effect of reducing the calculated level of subsidy since some oil fields had a reduced level of SC

It seems that while the branch holds strong, it's fun to take a saw to our support but now it's making worrying creaking noises, they suddenly get nervous.

One of the accusations aimed at Exxon is that they didn't warn their investors that action on CO2 would reduce company profits. Their investors might have a reason to complain about them not forseeing the plunging oil price but a lack of demand due to acting on CO2 isn't one of them.

Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran over producing to bankrupt each other. Putin cutting the price of gas to bankrupt NATO.

Logical trying to impose a moratorium on burning Fossil Fuels in the middle of an oil glut.

Meanwhile back in England 99.7 pence for a litre of unleaded at Sainsburys with Tesco's and Asda hot on the trail.The hardest working job in retail every manager of a petrol station having to keep changing the price sign every couple of hours.

At this rate it will be cheaper for every house hold in Britain to run a long lead down their drive way connected to the car battery whilst ticking over to power their homes than build Hinkley Point.

While we're mentioning World Bank schemes, I can thoroughly recommend the BH link to the Hayek Lecture [at the top right] "The Tyranny of Experts". William Easterly describes very well some the bad consequences of the do-gooders grand schemes to 'help' the world, whether the people 'helped' like it or not.

One amusing anecdote he reports, after describing the World Bank as liking to think of itself as "The World's Knowledge Bank", is the statistic reported by a World Bank researcher:

“31% of the World Bank's “knowledge products” have never been downloaded. 87% never cited”.

Perhaps it is actually a good thing that so few of their schemes see the light of day.

I watched William Easterly's Hayek lecture yesterday, so can second Michael Hart's recommendation. I am still incensed that 20,000 Ugandan farmers were evicted from their land at gun-point, so that a World Bank forestry scheme could go ahead.